Another Poll Demonstrates The GOP’s Problem With Latino Voters

Latinos who are registered voters favor President Obama by 69 percent to 21 percent over Mitt Romney, according to a national poll published on Thursday by the Pew Hispanic Center. The margin has not changed during this year despite recent efforts by Mr. Romney to lure some Latinos.

Mr. Obama’s lead over his challenger among Latinos in the final stretch of the race is larger than his margin in 2008 over John McCain, the Republican candidate. Mr. Obama won 67 percent of the Latino vote then, and Mr. McCain won 31 percent.

The Pew survey was conducted from Sept. 7 to Oct. 4, one day after the debate where Mr. Romney performed far better than the president. The lift Mr. Romney has received since then is not reflected in the poll.

But there are indications that Mr. Obama’s big advantage among Latinos remains solid. Approval for the Democratic Party among those voters is at its highest level since the Pew center began asking survey questions on the issue in 2002, said Mark Hugo Lopez, associate director of the center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington. In the poll, 61 percent of Latinos said the Democrats had “more concern” for them, up from 45 percent in 2011. Only 10 percent now say the Republican Party is more concerned about Latino issues, the poll found.

The impact of Latinos in the presidential election will very much depend on their turnout. According to the Pew poll, they are likely to continue to vote at lower rates than the general public, with 77 percent of registered Latinos saying they are “absolutely certain” to vote. In a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, the parent organization of the Hispanic center, 89 percent of all registered voters said they were certain to cast ballots.

I’ve noted many of these polls in recent months, and if anything the numbers just seem to be getting worse for the GOP. As I noted earlier this week, there are signs that Latino voters could have an influence on Presidential and Senate races in at least three states this year, and the impact of their vote is only likely to increase over the years. The one caveat, as noted is the fact that Latino voters tend to have lower turnout than the population as a whole. If the Obama campaign can somehow increase that turnout in states like Arizona and Nevada, though, it could make all the difference in the world.

About Doug MataconisDoug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway.
Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

Maybe you should reframe the question and just say that Latinos have a problem with conservative politics. Does anyone seriously believe that a demographic group where more than 50% of the children are born to single mothers has any interest in conservative politics.

Democrats have always had an advantage with Latino voters, but it never used to be this large. For all of Bush II’s faults, he at least recognized that the issue of illegal immigration was far more complicated than current Republican talking points allow. Brother Jeb seems to be on the same page, as does Mario Rubio. Eventually, more of the party will need to come over to the position of their more reasonable members if they want to get more of the Latino vote.

If it wasn’t for the heavily Republican Cubans, Obama’s advantage would be even more lopsided.
The Republicans have given non-Cuban Hispanics no reason to vote for them , IMO.
That’s why the Republicans have a problem

legion says:
Friday, October 12, 2012 at 11:16
@superdestroyer: You know, I hear rape victims are also liberally biased against d*ckbags who beat them, hold them down, and brutally assault them. It’s clearly the victims’ fault.

If you think this is a rational or compelling response that doesn’t make you look like a frothing lunatic with no sense of perspective who is unable to rationally discuss political differences, you’re spending too much time here Inside The Hive ™.

“Does anyone seriously believe that a demographic group where more than 50% of the children are born to single mothers has any interest in conservative politics.”

I think it’s funny you’re not embarrassed to think this much less put it in print.

FWIW, I think the GOP would do much to increase their Latino cohort by using the Spanish language to their advantage. Romney gets this. That’s why he went on Univision. If his campaign hasn’t distributed some flyers en Espanol, he’s an idiot. If the voting materials, including ballots, were offered in Spanish, turnout would be higher.

The key is to jettison the superdestroyers of the world –seriously, SD, who are you gonna vote for? A Democrat? — and finally embrace this country’s vibrant Latino culture.

Embracing a culture where more than half of the children are born to single women and a culture that supports open borders and unlimited immigration just means embracing higher taxes, poorer schools, more urban sprawl, and a larger government.

Also, what percentage of Latinos in the U.S. do you think can actually read and write in spanish. I believe the percentage if very low.

Once again, how does the more conservative party appeal to a demographic group that has no inclination to support conservative positions or implement any conservative policy. What can the Republicans do to appeal to Latinos when David Axelrod has the Democrats pushing a policy of taxing the rich and giving the money to core Democratic party groups like Latinos.

In its 2004 survey of 27 cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayor found that the homeless population was 49% African-American, 35% Caucasian, 13% Hispanic, 2% Native American, and 1% Asian (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2001)

Notice that at around 13% of the population is Latino/Hispanic. So, Democratic-voting Latinos do not seem to be immune to homelessness as your propose and whites are actually less likely to be homeless versus latinos and blacks. So, one could argue that a push for open borders and unlimited immigration is actually a push for more homeslessness.

Romney is doing about the same with Latinos as Reagan in 1980 or as Dole did in 1996. The idea that Latinos have ever voted for Republicans is laughable. All the Bush clan or Rubio are doing is giving the cheap labor Republicans what they want. The cheap labor Republicans would love to flood the U.S. with third world immigrants to push wages down and to push housing costs in what Elizabeth Warren calls “good neighborhoods” up.

What would any middle class white who is the core of the Republican Party want lower wages, higher housing costs, poorer schools, higher taxes, and having to learn a second or third language in order to get a job?

“Embracing a culture where more than half of the children are born to single women and a culture that supports open borders and unlimited immigration just means embracing higher taxes, poorer schools, more urban sprawl, and a larger government.”

The good news is that the culture you described and Latino culture are two totally separate things.

I guess for progressives it is easier to deal with stereotypes instead of looking up the data.

You of all people should not complain about “it is easier to deal with stereotypes,” Mr. “half the children are born to single women.”

Do you really think all of those”unmarried mothers” are going to vote the more conservative party? Do you think a culture of unmarried mothers and absent fathers is going to vote for the more conservative or the party that promises to tax intact families and transfer the money to them?

If you want to know what the Republican Party is fated to collapse all one hs to do is look at the birthrates in the U.S. and look at the groups that having children and those that are not. Also, how does the U.S. has an economy in the future that will be capable of funding massive amounts of entitlement spending with a population that is mainly raised by poor, single mothers?

Have you looked at Southern Califonria lately. High unemployment, bad schools, bad traffic, urban sprawl, and a place that whties are moving out of because there is no place for them in Southern California anymore.

A good question for DEmocrats is why do that want the rest of the U.S. to have the problems being experienced by California?

so the choice for the Republicans is to try to stay conservative in some form and let themselves be overwhelmed by the changing demographics of the U.S. where most Americans are poor and want the government to tax the crap out of the upper classes and transfer the wealth to those core blocks of the demographic party. Or the Republican Party can embrace the changing demographics and become the second, high tax, big spending, massive entitlement party. Of course, the question is then why does the U.S. need two political parties that agree on all of the major issues.

Either way how does the U.S. compete in the global marketplace when those least capable of raising children have the most children and the upper classes have the fewest children?

I take this as a progressive saying “I do not like demographics so I will refuse to think about.” The rest of the world must love it when progressives refuse to face data, face facts, and face the demographics trends of the U.S.

I guess since you do not like the idea that more than 50% of Hispanic children are born to single mothers and that many of those single mothers are teengers, it is easier to refuse to think about it instead of trying to adjust policy in the U.S. to lower the percentage of children born to singel mothers.

I guess taxing the crap out of the people who put off having children until they were married and could afford the children rather than ask irresponsible people to clean up their act.

But in the long run, what happens where there are not enough whites to tax to fund all of the entitlements that non-whites are demanding from the government?

I also find it odd that progressives insist that Hispanics and blacks be treated as “human beings” in the same week that progressives were in front of the Supreme Court arguing that it is legal and good public policy if the government can treat whites and Asians differently than blacks and Hispanics.

I guess progressives will never consider middle class whites like Abigail Fisher as a “human being.”

“I also find it odd that progressives insist that Hispanics and blacks be treated as “human beings” in the same week that progressives were in front of the Supreme Court arguing that it is legal and good public policy if the government can treat whites and Asians differently than blacks and Hispanics.”

Oh man….you caught us. Not only are “progressives” the real racists because of their support for affirmative action, they’re also hypocrites.

You would only consider it weak if you consider hypocrisy of no importance. If middle class whites are racist because they want to be treated the same as everyone else., the what do you believe of the elite whites (generally in very blue states) who send their own children to very white private schools. Is Joe Biden a hypocrite because his own children attend private prep schools that are 99% white?

maybe many progressives support open borders, unlimited immigration, and affirmative action for illegal immigrants because progressives think they are clever enough to avoid all of the negatives of open borders and unlimited immigration while being able to take advantage of the situation.

I have felt for sometime that the Republicans are missing the boat on this one. Develop a policy that would assimilate the Hispanics as quickly as possible into jobs, military, and education. These people have a strong family tradition, are involved in the church, and work very hard. I think over all they benefit this country. Of course, those who have records of drug selling or violent crimes would be deported immediately.

Your logic is why California has been lost to the Republicans forever and soon the U.S. will be a one party state. A demographic group where more than 50% of the children are born to single mothers does not really have a strong family tradition. Latinos do not attend church more than whites and actually give little in donations to the church. The unemployment rate for Hispanic is much higher than for whites. Latinos are much more likely to drop out of high schools and to fail school. So much for being hard working.

Too many cheap labor Republicans keep thinking that Hispanics are conservatives when all anyone has to do is listen to any elected Latino politician to realize that Latinos are actually very liberal and have zero interest in social conservative issues.

If you read the entire thread, you will see that I have provide a cite for the high level of unmarried mothers in the Hispanic community. And if Republicans should realize anything, it is single mothers are very loyal Democratic Party voters.

It’s not hard to understand why the GOP has a problem with Latino voters. Basically, Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio are the face of the Republican Party’s policy toward Latino voters.

So are you really going to claim that if Republicans supported open borders and unlimited immigration, that a large number of Hispanics would start voting for them. If Arizona Republicans were just willing to pay higher taxes to fund social spending for illegal immigrant, higher tuition for private schools to make up for lousy public schools, higher insurance to make up for all of the uninsured illegal aliens, and higher housing costs in the “good neighborhoods” as Elizabeth Warren defined them.

If the Republicans support open borders and unlimited immigration, they will be run out of power faster than the current demographic changes will lead to their irrelevance.